[Talk-GB] NaPTAN Data

[SK53]

I don't think you can assume this at all: it is a perpetual problem with a
single tag on imported data as to what it is one wants verified. For me
when I was worrying about it, verification was a) does the stop exist? & b)
is it in the right place?

When I've been looking at trees I've been concerned to verify existence &
whether the identification was accurate or not. In the latter case I found
that some of the trees in the Birmingham tree database were correct, but
not actually owned by the council as they had university tree register
tags. I'm not sure what status such things have.

Broadly speaking I think removal of the tag or changing it to yes releases
the element into the wild on OSM and thereafter anything is possible.

As for the other Naptan tags: I still make extensive use of Street,
Indicator & Location. Mainly for checking street names and adding addresses
in those LAs which added street address number in the Naptan data
(Merseyside & Greater Manchester). I would also think Bearing might have
some useful QA purpose too.

Jerry

On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 15:30, Cj Malone <
me-osm-talk-gb at keepawayfromfire.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 2021-03-09 at 09:45 +0000, Ken Kilfedder wrote:
>
>
> I'm pretty sure naptan:verified is supposed to be used to confirm
> verification of the other naptan:* tags, not just the physical
> existence of the bus stop.
>
> Specifically naptan:AtcoCode and/or naptan:NaptanCode, as far as I'm
> concerned the other naptan tags don't really make sense in OSM and we
> should consider deprecating them.
>
> Cj
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20210309/f9aaf056/attachment-0001.htm>